Muhammad Ibrahim v. Emperor

1. This application arises out of an order made by the Subordinate Judge of Agra, directing a prosecution under the provision of Section 476 of the Cr PC. The prosecution was directed in connexion with evidence given in a civil trial. Under the rulings of this Court such an order cannot be entertained in revision save under the provisions of Section 115 of the CPC.

2. It is suggested that as the final order directing the prosecution was not made by the same Subordinate Judge who originally heard the case, there was no jurisdiction to make the order. Ia our opinion this contention is without force. We may mention that the first step in connexion with the prosecution was taken by the very same Subordinate Judge who decided the civil case. But on the general question we may refer to Shaikh Bahadur v. Shaikh Eradatulla Mallick (1), where it was held that the expression “Court” in S. 476 includes the successor-in-office: see also Nawal Singh v. Emperor (2). We, of course express no opinion whatever on the merits. The application fails and is dismissed with costs.

V.B/R.K

3. Application dismissed.